Like some people might have noticed I worked on some janitor tasks in the last weeks. Now every open Issue has a Type label (some 35 closed ones are still lacking: current state), a Priority label (some 24 closed ones are still lacking: current state) and countless tickets have gotten a Theme label. As of today we have 112 open and 181 closed Issues lacking a Theme label (current state). I probably opened everyone of them, but have no more clue on how to label the last ones. Therefore I call for support! I you have the corresponding user rights on our bug tracker, please consider working on before mentioned list - and when opening a new Issue, please remember to use at least the three important label categories and a milestone. Why is this label important? If bug reports arise on the forums, it's not always possible to check on Gitea for the existance of already opened Issues by using the search function. We have no semantic search function, so it's sometimes just luck to find something if the words are matching. Then the search by Theme labels really helps. But if tickets haven't such label, we might open duplicate Issues which leads to problems in the future like redundant work etc.

Currently we have 97 Issues without a Milestone listed on Gitea. The oldest one has been opened 4 years ago, but it seems to me that new Issues without a Milestone increased since the migration from Trac to Gitea. Shall all Issues without a Milestone be backlogged? If yes, I'd proceed.  

Thanks to everybody who voted and participated. I think the trend was already identifiable by the vote so I went ahead and made the PR. Current key changes (might be amended by balancing members). Make some techs add capture points to associated building. Sentries add +50% to towers Professional Garrison add +100% to forts Add +500 base capture points to CC and +1000 capture point to Forts. Colonies almost unchanged. Support diminishing capture rates for CC and Forts See https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8892

Here are the results of applying a exponential decay of 1.5 above 100 capture/turn. Before : Screencast+from+2026-04-25+15-51-09.webm   After: Screencast+from+2026-04-25+15-56-10.webm   Maybe the current decay is too sever or the threshold too low. But here the fort with 20 champs do resist a bit longer to theses 150 legionaries as the defender would probably expect.

I agree that it introduce a technicality and that's something to avoid. But it's much less so confusing then a full hard cap on capture rate. Especially given that the regeneration would be applied afterward so a hard cap on the rate would just create a artificial point where defenses are strong enough to defend whatever. The exponential decay is, in that regard, far less likely to introduce counter-intuitive behavior. Still a technicality, but one subtle enough for players to never encounter any confusion moment even if they don't know about it. I also agree that generally you want linear rates wherever you can fit them, instead of exponential one, because exponential effects are so hard for humans to comprehend. But here "exponential decay" doesn't result in a "exponential" visible effect. Instead it aims at making capture rates more intuitive by making the faster captures actually slower, therefore likely more intuitive for the defender, and barely less intuitive, for the attacker.